Tag Archives: ptolemy

Astrological Sign Classifications | 2. Sect and Sex of the Signs

Posted on by
3

Variations on Sign Sect

In this installment of the series on sign qualities, I’ll explore sign sect and sign sex. There was a diversity of opinion regarding the classifications of signs into diurnal (day) signs and nocturnal (night) signs (i.e. sign sect) expressed in the 1st century CE, particularly in the work of Manilius. However, the typical arrangement where masculine signs are diurnal and feminine signs are nocturnal was dominant. In that arrangement, fire and air signs are both masculine and diurnal while water and earth signs are feminine and nocturnal. After exploring some of the early diversity in characterizing sign sect and sex, we will look at some uses of both sect and sex in the early tradition.

Three Types of Sign Sect in Manilius

Manilius composed his Astronomica, the oldest surviving complete book of Hellenistic astrology, in the 1st century CE. In it he noted (Book II, lines 203-222) a diversity of opinion regarding the sect of the signs. He himself actually favored a sect classification that is no longer used by traditional astrologers.

Fail not to perceive and from true rule deduce what signs are nocturnal, and what diurnal: they are not those that perform their function in darkness or daylight (the name would apply to all alike, since at regular intervals they shine at every house, and now the nocturnal ones accompany the day, and now the nocturnal ones accompany the night), but those on which nature, mighty parent of the universe, bestowed sacred portions of time in a permanent location.  The signs of the Archer and the fierce Lion, he who looks round on the golden fleece of his back [Aries], then the Fishes and the Crab and the Scorpion of stinging lash, signs either adjacent or spaced at equal intervals, are all under like estate termed diurnal.  The others, identical in number and in the pattern of their spacing, for they are inserted into as many places, are called nocturnal [i.e. there is six of them opposite the six diurnal signs and with the same pattern].  Some have also asserted that the diurnal stations [signs] belong to the six consecutive stars [signs] which begin with the Ram and that the six from the Balance [Libra] count as nocturnal.  There are those that fancy that the masculine signs are diurnal and that the feminine class rejoices in the safe cover of darkness.  (Goold trans., 1977, p. 99-101; bracketed notes added by me)

Fire and Water Signs as Diurnal

We find that by the first century CE, there were already at least three different means of classifying the signs as diurnal or nocturnal. Manilius appeared to favor the one that didn’t survive at all.  His favored classification is by triplicity, with two triplicities as diurnal, and two as nocturnal. The diurnal ones are those we associate with fire and water. The other two triplicities are nocturnal (those we associate earth and air). However, note that Manilius did not actually associate the triplicities with the four elements as we do today.

This scheme consists of two adjacent diurnal signs, followed by two adjacent nocturnal signs, and so forth; an alternation in pairs, starting with a Pisces-Aries diurnal pair. Note that these associations have a natural relation to the triplicities themselves (the subject of the last article). The cardinal members of the diurnal triplicites mark spring and summer, while those of the nocturnal ones mark fall and winter. One of the stranger consequences of this arrangement is the fact that both Cancer and Leo are diurnal by this method. Cancer is the home of the Moon, lord of the nocturnal sect. It seems strange to have her home as a diurnal sign. This arrangement did not catch on, and as far as I know is present only in Manilius.

Northern Celestial Hemisphere by Durer

Sect=Sex

The sect classification of the signs that came to dominate in Hellenistic astrology and through later strands of the tradition, is that which Manilius mentioned last. This arrangement matches sign sex with sign sect. Masculine signs are diurnal and the feminine signs are nocturnal in this scheme.

All ancient astrologers appear to agree that the masculine and feminine signs alternate through the zodiac; Aries masculine, Taurus feminine, Gemini masculine, and so forth. The association of odd numbers with the masculine and even numbers with the feminine is a Pythagorean one. The sex of the signs causes each of the five non-luminaries to have one masculine home and one feminine home. When this is extended to a sect distinction, each of the five non-luminaries has a day home and a night home.

This scheme also results in two day triplicities and two night ones. In this case fire and air are diurnal and masculine, while earth and water are nocturnal and feminine. A convenient way to remember which signs are masculine and which are feminine, is to know that fire and air have a propensity to stir and rise, while water and earth have a propensity to fall and settle. Similarly, fire and air are light like the day (diurnal) while water and earth are obscuring like the night (nocturnal).

Astrologers Using This Method

Manilius (1st century CE) noted this method among others. Most other Hellenistic astrologers simply only used this method. Those astrologers include Dorotheus (1st century CE) and Paulus Alexandrinus (4th century CE). Additionally, Ptolemy and Valens (both 2nd century CE) appeared to use this method, as did Porphyry (3rd century CE). Rhetorius (6th or 7th century CE) also used this method in the material on the signs attributed to Teucer of Babylon (~1st century CE), though some of that material was added by Rhetorius himself. There are other instances of astrologers associating benefit with diurnal planets in masculine signs and nocturnal planets in feminine signs as well (c.f. Serapio and Manetho discussed below).

Note on the Incongruity of Mars

The conflation of sect and sex is common, both today and in ancient astrology.  However, this does create some odd conflicts. For instance, it was considered beneficial for a planet to be in a sign of the same sex and/or sect as itself, but Mars is a masculine nocturnal planet. It does not have a domicile that is both its same sex and sect, as each other planet does.

Unfortunately, none of the sect arrangements discussed by Manilius resolve this incongruity. In the sect arrangement favored by Manilius, the same situation holds for Mars, as both Aries and Scorpio become diurnal signs, while Mars is a nocturnal planet. In the second classification (discussed below), Aries is masculine but still diurnal, while Scorpio is nocturnal but still feminine.

I favor the third sect arrangement given by Manilius, in which sect and sex are conflated.  My own approach to astrology is not strongly influenced by Manilius as he was not a very influential astrologer overall. It is my understanding that congruity with sect is more important than congruity with sex. It is often suggested (from Ptolemy, Book I, Ch. 7) that the sect of the malefics represent the fact that their extreme qualities are tempered and thus they are made more productive. Therefore, it may be that Mars runs so hot that his position in a nocturnal chart and/or in a nocturnal sign serves to cool him off and make him more productive.

Incongruity of Saturn?

Note that Saturn has been described as feminine and feminizing at times in ancient astrology. Dorotheus appeared to have described Saturn as feminine in Book I, Ch. 10 of Carmen. However, Dorotheus also associated Saturn with male family member rather than female ones. Additionally, Carmen has had some textual issues and errors due to transmission through a number of languages. It is unclear whether Dorotheus actually did consider Saturn to be a feminine planet. It doesn’t appear that other Hellenistic astrologers did so.

Nevertheless, whether masculine or feminine, Saturn is a cold and dark planet, yet a diurnal one. As with Mars, the contrasting quality of Saturn’s sect (diurnal in this case) helps to balance it and make it more productive. I would add that Jupiter, characterized as a moist and warm planet by Ptolemy, and as a fertile planet promising children by many Hellenistic astrologers, would seem to be a better contender for a feminine planet traditionally characterized as masculine.

Northern and Southern Signs

Manilius provided one additional classification. This one has the signs from Aries through Virgo as diurnal and those from Libra through Pisces as nocturnal.  This is logical from the perspective of the tropical zodiac in the northern hemisphere. Aries begins with the Spring Equinox, a moment where the quantity of day increases over the quantity of night. Libra begins with the Autumnal Equinox, a moment where the quantity of night increases over the quantity of day.  In other words, in this classification, the Sun is in diurnal signs when the length of the day exceeds that of the night, while the opposite is true when the Sun is in nocturnal signs. The converse situation holds in the southern hemisphere.

Equinoxes and Solstices from Space (courtesy of NASA)

In Persian medieval astrology, this is the classification of the signs as Northern or Southern (c.f. al-Qabisi, Dykes trans., 2010, p. 59).  The passing of the Sun into Aries is also the point when the Sun passes north of the celestial equator (i.e. the north pole is inclined toward the Sun). Similarly, when the Sun passes into Libra, the Sun goes south of the equator (i.e. the north pole is incline away from the Sun).  Some may not realize that this apparent passing of the Sun north and south of the equator, due to the tilt of the poles relative to the Sun, is what creates the seasons. The Earth is actually closest to the Sun (i.e. at perihelion) around January of each year, during winter in the northern hemisphere.

Friendship and Commanding Signs

The northern or diurnal signs in this arrangement were called the “commanding” signs in a fragment attributed to Dorotheus, while the southern or nocturnal ones were called “obeying” (Dorotheus, XVIII, #4, Dykes trans., 2017, p. 340). The same fragments attribute the Moon in these commanding signs with suitability for friendship. It is unclear whether this suitability pertains to a friendly person or to a good electional time to make friends, or possibly both. For more on the concept of commanding and obeying, see the article on sign symmetry relationships.

Sign Sect by Ruler? Not Exactly

Some early Hellenistic astrologers did not explicitly mention an inherent sect of the signs. For instance, I know of no such use of sign sect in Maternus, though he does mention sign sex. Additionally, Vettius Valens (2nd century CE) didn’t clearly delineate the sect of the signs but did associate being ruled by a sect mate as beneficial. This is worth a closer examination as some have taken it to imply that sign sect is determined by the sect of the sign ruler. Furthermore, some comments in Porphyry (3rd century CE; but text has additions) suggesting that sign sex can be determined by the sect of the sign’s ruler have been taken to support this view.

In such a scheme, both Aries and Scorpio are nocturnal as both are ruled by Mars, a planet of the nocturnal sect. Similarly, in this scheme both Capricorn and Aquarius are diurnal due to rulership by Saturn, a diurnal planet. However, I am not aware of any Hellenistic astrologers explicitly associating sign sect with the sect of the ruler, akin to the many references to sign sect from sign sex. A closer examination reveals that the confusion may arise due to the close relationship between sect and triplicity. Additionally, there are passages in both Valens and Pophyry which imply that they assigned sect to signs in the usual manner (masculine/feminine and pertaining to triplicity).

Inherent Relationship Between Sect and Triplicity

Water and earth signs always have nocturnal planets as triplicity rulers. Similarly, aside from Mercury as a triplicity ruler of air, fire and air signs always have diurnal planets as triplicity rulers. In fact, this is one of the reasons why the arrangement of masculine (fire and air) signs as diurnal and feminine (water and earth) signs as nocturnal makes so much sense. It is not just an association between sect and sex but it reflects the already existing association between sect and triplicity which was built into the system.

Valens on Sect Mate Rulership

Valens did not explicitly associate signs with sects in his exposition of the signs. However, he did sometimes speak of the sect of a sign as significant (Book I, Ch. 20P; Book VII, Ch. 41). Valens often mentioned triplicity and sect together, noting that planets of the same triplicity or sect can help each other out. In Hellenistic astrology, triplicity rulers are typically seen as supportive in a way that is suggestive of relatives. The planets of the same sect are similarly viewed as helping to support each other. By contrast, planets of the other triplicity or sect can exacerbate harm.

At one point Valens explicitly advised that astrologers should take note of the sect of the sign.

Is it the ruler of a lot, of the Ascendant, or of a triangle? Likewise with the sign in which the star appears: is it of its own or of another sect, and which other signs does it have in aspect? (Valens, Book I, Ch. 20P, Riley trans., 2010, p. 22)

Ruler: Domicile or Triplicity?

My impression is that Valens often refers to rulers of the same sect and rulers of the same triplicity interchangeably. This can lead to some ambiguity in the couple instances where Valens noted rulership by a sect mate as a positive thing. Traditional astrologers today, who stress domicile and ignore triplicity, are all too ready to interpret the ruler of the same sect as being the domicile ruler. However. Valens used the same terms, typically translated “ruler” or “houseruler” for both domicile and triplicity rulers. He also placed much greater stress on triplicity than most tradiitional astrologers today, discussing triplicity much more often than domicile (often specified as ruler of the sign). Furthermore, sign sect is intimately linked with triplicity for Valens, as we’ll see.

Triplicity Pertains to the Subdivision of the Zodiac into Sects

Valens made explicit the close connection between sect and triplicity in his chapter on triplicity which opens as follows:

1. The Triangles
When the zodiacal circle is subdivided according to similarities and differences, we find two sects, solar and lunar, day and night. The sun, being fiery, is most related to Aries, Leo, and Sagittarius, and this triangle of the sun is called “of the day-sect” because it too is fiery by nature. The sun has attached Jupiter and Saturn to this sect as his co-workers and guardians of the things which he accomplishes[…] (Valens, Book II, Ch. 1, Riley trans., 2010, p. 25)

Additionally, he closed the chapter on triplicities by noting that Mercury is common and works with both sects.

This chapter on triplicity shows how closely linked triplicity and sect are to Valens.  Furthermore, the first sentence implies that Valens subdivided the zodiac by sect. The directly following discussion of triplicity implies that triplicity is the basis of this subdivision. Therefore, it is fairly safe to conclude that Valens did not have an alternate method of dividing the signs by sect but instead used the typical method, linking it strongly to triplicity.

Porphyry: Planetary Sect Determines Sign Sex?

The text of Pophyry has undergone some additions and possibly some corruptions on its way to us. For instance, it is well known that some later material was added by Byzantine compilers including chapter 53-55 which are from the Perso-Arabic astrologer Sahl. Sign sex is typically a non-controversial issue. Nearly every Hellenistic astrologer noted the sex of the signs and without variation. Porphyry notes the sex of the signs in a way consistent with those other astrologers but then has a particularly convoluted passage in the same section in which it is done another way. The passage is likely the result of corruption as it suggests that the sect of the ruler of the sign determines the sign’s sex. Note that while sometimes taken to support the view that the sect of the ruler determines the sect of a sign, the passage actually noted sign sex, not sign sect.

The [signs that are] masculine by sect are those of the Sun, Jupiter, and Saturn. And let [every other one of] the signs be masculine [starting] from Aries. The [signs that are] feminine [by sect] [are those] of the Moon, Mars, and Venus. Let every other one of the [signs] be feminine [starting] from Taurus.  (Porphyry, Ch. 40, Holden trans., 2009, p. 30)

Interestingly, while giving two different definitions for sign sex concurrently, the passage continues by apparently walking back the assertion that sign sex is determined by sect of the ruler.

But choose individually [from] the feminine [signs] Capricorn for Saturn, Pisces for Jupiter; and of the masculine [signs] Aries for Mars, [and] Libra for Venus; but [in the case] of Mercury, choose [both] Gemini and Virgo, for it has those in common. (Porphyry, Ch. 40, Holden trans., 2009, p. 30)

Deconstructing Porphyry’s Treatment

There are two things of note here. The first is the fact that the Sun’s triplicity is associated with masculine signs while the Moon’s triplicity is associated with feminine signs. This can be explained by the fact that the passage confuses triplicity rulers with domicile rulers. Triplicity is linked with the sect and sex of the signs. However, the assertion that domicile rulers determine sex is incorrect and confuses the two types of rulers. Either Porphyry or one of his compilers got some wires crossed here.

The second thing to note is that Porphyry does provide the typical masculine/feminine distinction as well. He even goes out of his way to note that Saturn and Jupiter each have feminine signs that they rule, despite the fact that they’re diurnal planets. He does the same with the nocturnal planets and their masculine homes.

In conclusion, Porphyry’s text, like that of Valens, illustrates a close connection between triplicity and sect, but does not imply an alternate methodology of assigning sect to the signs.

The Hephaistion Alternative

Hephaistos (5th century CE) had an alternate method of assigning sect to the stars. It is unclear if he actually used it though. In the first chapter of the first book of his Apotolelsmatiks, he classified some signs as diurnal and some as nocturnal. His method of assignment appears to be unique among the Hellenistic astrologers. The assignments of Hephaistos imply that the signs from Leo through Capricorn are diurnal, while those from Aquarius to Cancer are nocturnal. This cleaves the zodiac into diurnal and nocturnal halves at the cusp between the homes of the Sun and Moon.

As Hephaistos didn’t seem to actually use this distinction in practice and actually did not even note the sect of 5 of the signs, I bring this distinction up for the sake of completeness only.

What is Sect Anyway?

Sect is the division of the planets into a day and a night group. The Sun leads the day sect and the Moon leads the night sect. Each group also has a benefic and a malefic in addition to its leader or luminary. The Sun, Jupiter, and Saturn are diurnal. The Moon, Venus, and Mars are nocturnal. Mercury is considered neutral. Some considered it diurnal when rising before the Sun and nocturnal when rising after the Sun (see orientality below) but there were other schemes as well. For instance, the anonymous author of the Michigan Papyrus (~2nd century CE) instructed that Mercury is simply always of the sect of the chart (Anonymous, Col. VIII, Robbins trans., 1936). Also, see below on the sect of the chart halves for the Valens variant.

Sect of the Chart

The most important consideration is the sect of the chart itself. If the Sun is above the horizon (i.e. by day) then diurnal planets become more benefic and less malefic, while the converse is true of nocturnal planets. When it is night (Sun below the horizon) then the opposite situation holds and it is the nocturnal planets which are in sect. In other words, your sect matters. If you are born during the day then you are diurnal, and he diurnal planets are like family. If you are born at night, then the nocturnal planets are like family.

Sect of the Signs; Sect of the Halves

The advice to consider the sect of the sign also may have merit and should be considered, perhaps in the way recommended by Ptolemy (see below). An additional consideration often noted is that diurnal planets want to be on the same side of the horizon as the Sun while nocturnal ones want to be on the opposite side. This was termed “halb” meaning half and is another consideration worth exploring. Is a diurnal planet that is in sect (i.e. by day) made less benefic if it is in a nocturnal sign and under the horizon? More work is needed in this area.

It is necessary to examine the sects of the stars: for day births the sun, Jupiter, and Saturn rejoice above the earth; for night births, below the earth. For night births the moon, Mars, and Venus rejoice above the earth; for day births below the earth. Mercury rejoices according to the sect of the houseruler in whose terms the star is located. Consequently for day births, if a nativity is found to have Jupiter, the sun, or Saturn favorably configured above the earth, this will be better than having them below the earth.
Likewise <for night births> it is advantageous if the nocturnal stars are found above the earth. (Valens, Book III, Ch. 5, Riley trans., 2010, p. 62)

Note that while this quote seems to imply that Valens chiefly considered halb, in practice he chiefly considered the sect of the chart. There are many examples in his text, but see for instance Book IV, Ch. 8, when he notes death being associated with Saturn in Sagittarius because Saturn is not in its own sect. The chart has Ascendant in Pisces and Sun in Cancer (V), so Saturn (in X) was above the horizon in a night chart, but still out of sect and difficult due to the fact that it was a night chart.

Aspects from Sect Mates

Aspects from sect mates were typically considered helpful in early Hellenistic astrology. By contrast, aspects from non-sect mates could be less helpful or more harmful. For instance, Valens noted in multiple places that difficult aspects were more difficult when planets were of opposite sect.

One must observe whether the stars of the night or of the day sect are configured with their sect mates. If they are, they will be more effective for good than the other stars and will be a cause of great good fortune at the times of their own transmissions and transits. If they are not so configured, they will prevent any advancement in rank and will hinder any benefits.  (Valens, Book IV, Ch. 13, Riley trans., 2010, p. 81-82)

Similarly, in the length of life technique he allowed sect mates to add to the length of life indicated by the main significator.

The fellow-members of their sects, when in conjunction, in aspect, or in their own signs, add to the allotment, unless both sects in fact join in the allotment. (Valens, Book III, Ch. 11P, Riley trans., 2010, p. 69)

Use of Sign Sect

Note that all the uses of sign sect that I cite here seem to use the scheme where the sign sect is determined in the same way as its sex. This was the dominant scheme in Hellenistic astrology. Manilius (1st century CE) noted it as one scheme used by astrologers in his time. Dorotheus (1st century CE) also explicitly defined sign sect this way (Book I, Ch. 30), and not in any other. He also used it for a type of rejoicing condition (Book I, Ch. 1). It is typically inferred that Ptolemy intended this arrangement as well as he noted that the day is masculine and night is feminine (Book I, Ch. 7) and that planets are weakened when lacking any rulership of their position and in a sign of the opposite sect (Book I, Ch. 23). However, it is possible that Ptolemy was referring to rulership of the position by a planet of the same sect as the subject planet.

Rejoicing Conditions

As noted above, one use of sect was that a planet was said to rejoice in a sign of the same sect. For instance, Dorotheus noted that the planets rejoice in the domicile of the same sect: Saturn in Aquarius; Jupiter in Sagittarius; Mars in Scorpio; Venus in Taurus (Book I, Ch. 1). He also noted Mercury in Virgo, though that appears to relate more to Mercury being exalted there, as Mercury is said to be ambiguous as to sect. Other astrologers noted similarly regarding sign sect.

[..] diurnal stars rejoice in masculine signs and when oriental to the Sun; and those of the nocturnal sect rejoice in feminine signs and when occidental to the Moon. (Serapio, Holden trans., 2009, p. 68)

Note that in this passage the planets are identified by sect, not sex, but the signs are identified by sex. The implication appears to be that sect is the real consideration here, but by making reference to the sex of the signs it is certainly clearer which sense of sign sect is being used.

Sign-Based Strengthening

Ptolemy(2nd century CE) used sign sect in a way that is reflective of the rejoicing conditions. He noted that a planet is strengthened (maximally effective by sign) if it has at least two forms of rulership at its own position (see Tetrabilos, Book I, Ch. 23). This could be rulership by domicile, exaltation, triplicity, or bound. Ptolemy also noted two sign-based weakening conditions, which included fall, but not detriment. Detriment does not appear to have been part of the sign-based rejoicing conditions for any of the Hellenistic astrologers prior to the 6th or 7th century.

No, the other condition noted by Ptolemy is when a planet has no rulership in its position at all and also is in a sign of the opposite sect. Being in a sign of the same sect was considered by Ptolemy to provide a sort of indirect strength. This indirect strength could mitigate against the possible weakening and corruption of being in an alien position (a sign and bound where the planet had no rulership). In this scheme, Saturn in Leo would be strengthened by being in a sign of its triplicity and sect, but Saturn in Scorpio may be particularly weakened or corrupted if not in its own bound, as Saturn has no rulership and the sign is of the opposite sect.

They say they “rejoice”when, even though the containing signs have no familiarity with the [stars] themselves, nevertheless they have it with the stars of the same sect; in this case the sympathy arises less directly. They share, however, in the similarity in the same way; just as, on the contrary, when they are found in alien regions belonging to the opposite sect, a great part of their proper power is paralysed, because the temperament which arises from the dissimilarity of the signs produces a different and adulterated nature. (Ptolemy, Book I, Ch. 23, Robbins trans., 1940, p. 113, bracketed text is my correction of where the translation again says “signs”)

Use of Sign Sex

The sex of the signs were used in many practical applications in ancient astrology, typically pertaining to matters of gender and sexuality. I will only touch on a couple uses here. For more details see treatments of sexuality in the literature. Treatments of sexuality from sign sex tended to focus on indications from the Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, and Mars. Other factors pertaining to sexuality, including some of the factors discussed further in this article were also considered.

Ease of Birth

Dorotheus (Ch. I.3) used the sex of the signs of the Sun, Moon, and Ascendant to assess the ease of birth. For a male, birth is easier if they are in male signs. For a female, birth is easier if they are in female signs. Additionally, he noted that Saturn in a stake can cause problems, especially if in a female sign (diurnal planet in a nocturnal sign). Also, that Mars can hasten birth along to be quick if in a stake, especially if in a female sign (nocturnal planet in a nocturnal sign). The sense is that male positions make things come easier for men, while female ones work best for women. Incongruity creates struggle.

Positive Character

Manetho also referred to sign sex, rather than sect, similar to the way it was used by Serapio.  However, one of Manetho’s uses for sign sex is consistent with sect and pertains to benefit, a major association of sect congruity. Manetho attributed the lights in the signs of their same sex/sect with those that “easily accomplish deeds and tasks” (p. 235). To the contrary if both were in masculine signs then someone would be savage while if both were in feminine signs one would be subservient. Those with the Sun and Moon both in the signs of their opposite sex/sect would be socially awkward and unable to progress. Similarly, the sex of the person was important, as lights in masculine signs worked better for males than females, and vice-versa with feminine signs.

Predicting Sex

Twelfth-part sign sex, especially of the Moon, often figures heavily into prediction of the sex of someone who was born (yes, it’s easier and more accurate to just look). I addressed this in the article on the twelfth-parts. Both Dorotheus and Valens put a lot of stress on the sex of the twelfth-part of the Moon. Valens advised to also look at the sex of the sign of the ruler of the Moon’s twelfth-part. Dorotheus had a number of exceptions that pertain mainly to whether the Sun, Moon, and Ascendant are in male signs or a male planet is in the Ascendant.

Sex Beyond Signs

The early Hellenistic astrologers classified 4 planets as masculine (the Sun, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn), 2 as feminine (the Moon and Venus), and 1 as neutral (Mercury). This gender imbalance is notable. Ptolemy associated the feminine with moisture and the masculine with dryness which makes the gender imbalance all the odder as Jupiter is characterized by him as hot and moist. However, Ptolemy noted that planets can become masculine or feminine by way of their relationship with the Sun and their position by quadrant.

They say too that the stars become masculine or feminine according to their aspects to the sun, for when they are morning stars and precede the sun they become masculine, and feminine when they are evening stars and follow the sun. Furthermore this happens also according to their positions with respect to the horizon; for when they are in positions from the orient to mid-heaven, or again from the occident to lower mid-heaven, they become masculine because they are eastern, but in the other two quadrants, as western stars, they become feminine. (Ptolemy, Book I, Ch. 6, Robbins trans., p. 41)

Orientality

In a quote earlier in this article, the Serapio text contrasted stars oriental to the Sun (i.e. rising and setting before the Sun) as masculine, and those occidental the Moon as feminine. However, the contrast is typically between planets oriental or occidental to the Sun. The Serapio text is actually a late Byzantine compilation known to contain many errors and additions. This appears to be a distortion of the oft-cited instruction that oriental stars are given to the Sun while occidental (are given) to the Moon (c.f. Porphyry, Ch. 4). Planets rising before the Sun (i.e. visible in the morning before dawn) are oriental and masculine. By contrast, those rising after the Sun (i.e. visible at night after sunset) are occidental and feminine. Interestingly, Serapio associated this rejoicing condition with the sect rather than the sex of the planets (as did Paulus Alexandrinus in Ch. 4 of his Introductory Matters).

Quadrants

In addition to sign sex and orientality, there is an additional sex consideration. This is the consideration of masculine and feminine quadrants. Planets approaching a meridian (i.e in the quadrants from Asc to MC or Dsc to IC – clockwise) were considered to be masculine. By contrast, those approaching the horizon (i.e. from IC to Asc or MC to Dsc) were considered feminine. To remember this think that going vertical (toward the point at the top or bottom of the chart; MC or IC) is masculine while going horizontal (toward the horizon; Asc or Dsc) is feminine.

Conclusion

In conclusion, there were 3 methods of classifying the sect of a sign in Manilius. The method favored by Manilius has all but disappeared. The common method of conflating sign and sex was present in some of the earliest astrologers of the tradition. An additional method survives in the concept of northern and southern signs. For more on the relationship between northern and southern signs, see the article on sign symmetry and antiscia.

Sign sect is strongly related to triplicity and the notion of a support network. I recommend the use of sign sect in the ways noted by Ptolemy and Valens. Through sign sect, a planet can have a form of minor strength, especially if also aspected by a triplicity ruler.

References

Anonymous. (1936). “P.Mich.inv. 1.” (F.E. Robbins Trans.) http://quod.lib.umich.edu/a/apis/x-1290/1xvii_a.tif. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed: January 09, 2019.

Dorotheus of Sidon, & al-Tabari, U. (2017). Carmen Astrologicum: The ’Umar al-Tabari Translation. (B. N. Dykes, Trans.). Minneapolis, Minn.,: The Cazimi Press. 

Ma’shar, A., & Al-Qabisi. (2010). Introductions to Traditional Astrology. (B. N. Dykes, Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: The Cazimi Press.

Manilius, M. (1977). Astronomica. (G. P. Goold, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Loeb Classical Library.

Porphyry, & Serapio. (2009). Porphyry the Philosopher. (J. H. Holden, Trans.). Tempe, AZ: American Federation of Astrologers.

Ptolemy, C. (1940). Ptolemy: Tetrabiblos. (F. E. Robbins, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Loeb Classical Library. Retrieved from http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Ptolemy/Tetrabiblos/home.html

Valens, V. (2010). Anthologies. (M. Riley, Trans.) (Online PDF.). World Wide Web: Mark Riley. Retrieved from http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/Vettius%20Valens%20entire.pdf

Images

The featured image of Day and Night by Simeon Solomon (cropped) is in the public domain.

Image of northern celestial sphere by Albrecht Durer (1515) is in the public domain. 

Image of equinoxes and solistices from space is courtesy of NASA and in the public domain.

Update

Note that this article was significantly revised and updated on 01/15/2019 with the addition of much additional material.

Astrological Sign Classifications | 1. Winds and Elements in Triplicity

Posted on by
2

Seasons and Images

Astrological signs are organized into many different classes in ancient astrology.  Some classes are complicated by the fact that various sign classifications pertain to associations with the “species” of things “imaged”  in the constellations while others pertain to associations with the seasons. Horoscopic astrology originated during a time when the sidereal zodiac, relating to the “images” of the stars, was roughly aligned with the tropical zodiac, pertaining to the seasons. Sign associations in Hellenistic astrology sometimes align more with the tropical zodiac and at other times align more with the sidereal one.

A Rich History

On this site, I always try to stress the diversity of opinion, and richness that existed in Hellenistic astrology. The prevailing attitude in modern traditional astrological circles is of a more unified first tradition which later became more diverse, for better or worse. On the contrary, Hellenistic astrology is incredibly heterogeneous and robust. From our earliest surviving texts of the 1st century CE, astrologers are already noting a diversity of opinion and multiple approaches to many topics (see Ancient Astrologers Didn’t All Agree).

The Four Groups of Three

The many classifications of the signs that existed in the Hellenistic period are one example of its richness. These classifications will be addressed in this series of articles. To start, we will look at the origins of one of the more popular classifications of signs today. This is the four types of three signs each known by element as the fire signs, earth signs, air signs, and water signs. As each group of signs has three members which are in a triangular relationship with each other, each group was called a triplicity or triangle.

Triplicity without Elements

In a fascinating segment of a podcast by Chris Brennan ((Nov. 11, 2011; starting at minute 49:00), he discussed how the astrological signs were not originally associated with elements.  In fact, as Brennan (2011) noted, in the majority of the surviving Hellenistic works, the elements are not associated with triplicity at all.

For those new to the concept of triplicity, it is the 4 groups of 3 signs each that are all in 120 degree relationships to each other. The triplicities are also called trigons or triangles, as the signs of a triplicity are trine each other, together forming an equilateral triangle in the zodiac. The trine is considered a relationship of perfect friendship. These signs were held to have a particularly strong harmonious relationship with each other.

Elements without Triplicity

Four Elements by Isidore of Seville

Today, we know these triplicities best by the elements. Fire signs include Aries, Leo, and Sagittarius. Earth signs include Capricorn, Taurus, and Virgo. Air signs include Libra, Aquarius, and Gemini. Water signs include Cancer, Scorpio, and Pisces. What is notable is that these four groupings of three signs were used in Hellenistic astrology prior to any association with the four elements. 

It is not that astrologers didn’t associate some signs with water or earth though. Manilius (1st century CE; Book II, 223-233) noted that Cancer and Pisces are aquatic. He also noted that Aries, Taurus, Leo, and Scorpio are terrestrial. Similarly, Capricorn and Aquarius are amphibious. It is assumed that he regarded Gemini, Virgo, Libra, and Sagittarius as human signs, as many astrologers of the day did. These associations do not include all four elements. Nor do they pertain to the triplicities. Rather, these associations are based on the “images” of the signs.

Directions of the Winds

Instead of elements, the triplicities were associated with the four winds in some early texts.  In one conception, the modern triplicity of Fire was associated with the east wind. Similarly, today’s Earth signs were associated with the south wind, Air signs with the west wind, and Water signs with the north wind. The association of the signs with these directions prevailed in the medieval period. For instance, both Abu Ma’shar (9th century) and al-Qabisi (10th century) associated the triplicities with these directions.

This us based on the directions of the cardinal sign of each triplicity relative to the northern hemisphere. The cardinal sign of each triplicity is the sign that starts with a point of an equinox or solstice (Aries for fire, Cancer for water, Libra for air, Capricorn for earth). Cancer (water) marks the point when the Sun is furthest north (summer solstice), while Capricorn (earth) marks its furthest declination south. Aries (fire) to the right of Cancer is east and Libra (air) to the left of Cancer is west. One can imagine also that Aries (fire), the first sign, is rising (eastern), which would see Capricorn (earth) culminating in the south, while Libra (air) is setting in the west, and Cancer (water) is northern.

Variation

This association of triplicities with winds is made explicit in Paulus Alexandrinus (4th century; see Greenbaum, 2001, p. 1-4). As noted, it also came to prevail in the medieval period. However, it is not a common association in Hellenistic texts. Most astrologers did not associate triplicities with winds at all. Additionally, some astrologers associated different directions with triplicities. Ptolemy (2nd century), assigned winds to triplicities based on the planets that rule the signs (see Robbins, 1940, p. 85-88). The earth signs are southern in Ptolemy’s reckoning also, but the fire signs are northern, the air signs are eastern, and the water signs are western (as far as characterizing winds). Additionally, Firmicus Maternus (4th century) followed the Ptolemaic association of winds and triplicities (Book II, Ch. 12).

Triplicity Lords

The more common early association of triplicity was simply with a special set of rulers which pertained to each group of signs. These triplicity rulers were usually examined as playing a supportive role in relation to the matters signified by the sign in a particular chart. They were also used to signify the beginning, middle, and end stages in a signification that may change over time. For more on the triplicity rulers, see the lesson on the signs.

The Four Elements

The establishment of the doctrine that there are four ultimate elements or roots which structure our world is attributed to the Greek philosopher, Empedocles, of the 5th century BCE. It became a facet of many later physics, including those of Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics. What is notable is that the Stoics and Aristotle differed in the basic primary quality that they assigned to each element.  As Brennan (2011) noted, Aristotle contrasted hot Fire with cold Water, and wet Air with dry Earth. Though Interestingly, the Stoics contrasted hot Fire with cold Air, and wet Water with dry Earth.

However, this difference between Stoic and Aristotelian conceptions may have been a matter of emphasis only. Aristotle actually conceived of each element as an intersection of two qualities. Water is the intersection of cold and wet, Air of hot and wet, Fire of hot and dry, and Earth of cold and dry.

A Possible Stoic Emphasis in Valens

Brennan (2011) asserted that Valens’ conception of the elements is more Stoic than Aristotelian. He also insists that this is the most logical characterization of the elements for astrological usage. This conception places signs of opposite quality (hot/cold, wet/dry) in opposition to each other. In the Stoic conception, air is cold and fire is hot, so the cold air signs are in opposition to the hot fire signs. Similarly, water is wet and earth is dry by the Stoic reckoning, so the water signs, are opposite the dry, earth signs. Additionally, water is logically wet, and fire hot, while earth is dry without water and moving air is cooling.

From my reading of Valens, it appears that Brennan is referring to Book IV of Valens’ Anthology (Riley, p. 73). There is a predictively-oriented passage in which Valens has an aside about the logic of one sign handing off rulership of a time to the sign opposite it. He discussed contrasting and sympathetic qualities, such as earthy signs being dry and watery being moist. There are also hints regarding elemental qualities of the signs in Book I’s exposition of the signs, but no full association of elements with triplicities.

Hellenistic Elemental Triplicities

While an association of the elements with triplicities was not a part of early “mainstream” Hellenistic astrology, it was well-established by the time of Rhetorius (7th century CE). Rhetorius’ Compendium makes explicit an association of the elements with the signs. We also see it in Rhetorius’ included translation of Teucer of Babylon’s exposition of the signs (2nd century). Therefore, it is possible the association extends back to the 2nd century. However, Rhetorius added many elements to the Teucer text, including possibly the elemental associations.

An association of the elements with the triplicities may also be evident in Firmicus Maternus (4th century) but the evidence is inconclusive. Maternus noted Aries as fiery and Pisces as watery. However, due to corruption of the text, we don’t have his material on the associations of the other 10 signs.

Elemental Popularity

The association of elements with triplicity became an increasingly popular association through the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, right up to the present time. This was in part due to the growing prominence of Aristotelianism in the medieval worldview.  Hence, the elements came to be the primary descriptor of the triplicities. Additionally, the elements themselves came to be associated with their Aristotelian qualities, in which Fire is hot (and dry), Earth is dry (and cold), Air is wet (and hot), and Water is cold (and wet).

Conclusion

The association of the elements to the triplicities may not be an essential or early part of Hellenistic astrology. By contrast, triplicity itself was an important consideration from the earliest texts. The introduction of the elements into astrology may have been Stoic physics in conception. However, in the later tradition it became dominated by an Aristotelian view. The four elements have an ancient Greek origin in Empedocles (5th century BCE). Their association with the triplicities was not immediate but became well-established before the end of the Hellenistic era of astrology. Because of their fruitful association with the elements, the triplicities continue to be among the most popular groupings of signs in astrology today.

References

Brennan, C. (2011, November 11). Latest News in Traditional Astrology. Traditional Astrology Radio. Retrieved from http://www.blogtalkradio.com/wtaradio/2011/11/11/latest-news-in-traditional-astrology–november-11-2011

Ptolemy, C. (1940). Ptolemy: Tetrabiblos. (F. E. Robbins, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Loeb Classical Library.  Retrieved from http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Ptolemy/Tetrabiblos/home.html

Valens, V. (2010). Anthologies. (M. Riley, Trans.) (Online PDF.). World Wide Web: Mark Riley. Retrieved from http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/Vettius%20Valens%20entire.pdf

Image Attributions

Featured image of detail of an astronomical clock in Prague (cropped) by Maros M r a z (Maros) [GFDL or CC-BY-SA-3.0], from Wikimedia Commons

The image of the Four Elements by Isidore of Seville is in the public domain.

UPDATE: This article was significantly re-written in Nov. 2018 for greater clarity.

Dignity: The Biggest Problem with Late Traditional Astrology

Posted on by
23

Dignity Pointing in Late Traditional Astrology

One of the most ubiquitous aspects of late traditional astrology is the use of a dignity pointing system. In the typical dignity pointing system, rulers of a position are assigned points in a weighted fashion. The ruler with the most points is the “winner”. Sometimes the winner is called the almuten or al-mubtazz (again from words meaning winner).

Almutens: What’s a Winner?

This winner planet is judged to have the most significant “testimony” among all the planets with “testimony”. In other words, all the rulers have some testimony, i.e. say something. However, the planet with the most testimony says the most important things. The testimony we are referring to is in regards to the matter signified by the specified position. For instance, to examine the Lot of Fortune, we could look at the dignity scores of each of its rulers to determine which planet is the most important one to analyze in relation to the lot.

You can also have winners over many points. In fact, in later medieval astrology it was common to look at which planet had testimony over multiple points in order to judge the “winner” for a specific topic. For instance, one could add up the dignity points for all the rulers of the Sun, Moon, Ascendant, Fortune, and the prenatal syzygy (New or Full Moon). The planet with the greatest dignity points in total over all these powerful positions in the chart could be said to be the overall chart “winner”. This planet would be called the chart ruler or even be said to signify the guardian angel of the individual. Similarly, one could look at the planet with the most dignity over Jupiter, the 2nd place, and Fortune for a “winner” regarding money matters.

Adding It Up

In a typical dignity pointing system, the domicile ruler of a position gets 5 points, the exaltation ruler gets 4 points, the triplicity rulers each get 3 points, the term ruler gets 2 points, and the ruler of the decan gets 1 point. Some astrologers also assigned points for different house positions and the planetary day or hour rulers.

Useless Math

I consider the over-emphasis on dignity to be one of the single biggest corrupting influences degrading astrological accuracy in today’s traditional circles. The related use of weighted dignity pointing systems exacerbates the problem. Here I take a closer look at dignity pointing, and why it should not be used. I also discuss why dignity as a factor should be given much less weight than it currently receives. Issues around “detriment” as a concept, and particularly the treatment of dignity as just that, showing “dignity” (i.e. goodness), are particularly troublesome areas.

Dignity in Traditional Astrology Today

As noted, dignity is used extensively in pointing techniques to find winners. For instance, Abraham Ibn Ezra used a system in which dignity points are combined with house placement points, and points for the planetary day and hour. The winner (i.e. planet with the most total points) is the “chart ruler”. Robert Zoller followed suit in his ebooks and astrological course. Many of today’s traditional astrologers, such as Deborah Houlding of the informative Skyscript website, largely follow William Lilly in their approach. Lilly relied heavily on dignity pointing.

In addition, to the use of dignity pointing for finding a winner over a specific position (i.e. a most relevant planet), it is also used for judging a planet itself. To do this, one looks at the dignity score of a planet in its own position. A planet with a higher score in its own position is viewed as stronger and/or more beneficial, while a lower score makes it less so. Some even view peregrine planets (those with no specific sign dignity) as afflicted or debilitated.

Subtracting?

Astrologers using point systems typically assign negative scores as well. A planet with an overall negative score is viewed as weak and/or more malefic. A negative 4 point value is given to a planet in fall. Fall (i.e. being opposite the sign of exaltation) was considered weakening or indicative of low status categories in Hellenistic astrology. Furthermore, they assign a negative 5 point value to a planet in detriment (i.e. opposite its domicile).

This is interesting as detriment was not used as a weakening condition or negative dignity at all by all of the major figures of Hellenistic astrology. Dorotheus, Ptolemy, Valens, Manilius, Maternus – these astrologers did not use any concept equivalent to detriment. Despite the lack of “detriment” as a significant concept in Hellenistic astrology, astrologers using the point system in this way treat it as the most afflicted position.

Strong or Benefic?

There is confusion in traditional circles as to whether having more dignity in its own position makes a planet stronger, more fortunate, or both. The consensus appears to be that it makes it more fortunate. This is expressed in the term itself. Something “dignified” is more socially acceptable and well composed. However, many astrologers, including Robert Zoller, have implied that it involves both strength and quality. Zoller has taught (in his natal course) that a planet with more dignity is more capable and competent, while a planet with negative dignity is like one who has consumed a substance counter to their own vitality, i.e. like a drunkard. My own position is that ruling its own place just makes a planet reinforced, and thus more prominent and independent (a type of strength).

Origins of Dignity Pointing

The pointing system based on sign dignity is found first in the astrology of very late Persian medieval astrologers. It was carried on by European astrologers of the High Middle Ages and Renaissance, right up through the 17th century astrology of William Lilly and Morinus. It is still leaned on heavily in the traditional community at large.

However, the use of a weighted pointing system for dignity was absent in Hellenistic astrology. Also, early Persian medieval astrologers like Sahl, Masha’allah, and Abu Ali did not use such as system. In fact, according to Benjamin Dykes (Persian Nativities II

, 2010, pp. xiii-xiv) the dignity pointing system may be the invention of a 9th-century Persian astrologer and he may have had a reputation as a con man (Al-‘Anbas).

Among the Hellenistic astrologers, Ptolemy had a technique for discovering a predominant influence over a position. It does not use weighted dignity and it does consider aspect, unlike the typical almuten approaches. Ptolemy’s technique is very different from the later dignity-pointing techniques but may have inspired them. Let’s take a look at it.

Ptolemy’s “Predominator”

A type of dignity pointing is used in Hellenistic astrology but it is very different from that used in late medieval astrology. It is found in Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos. Ptolemy used a pointing system in which each of the aforementioned dignities gets one equal point, except for decan which is absent. Rather than decan, Ptolemy used planetary regards (often translated as “face”) as another point. Basically, if a planet is in the place or with the planet/lot in the same sign, or is in whole sign aspect to the place/planet/lot, then it gets one point.

Venus as a Predominator in Scorpio

To clarify, any planet that was the domicile, exaltation, triplicity, or term ruler would get one point for each form of rulership. Additionally, any planet regarding a position, would get one point of testimony for that position. For example, take a position in Scorpio in the term of Venus, with Venus regarding the position from Virgo (a sextile). Venus would get one point for triplicity, another for term, and another for regard (3 points total). If Mars does not regard the place then Mars would have only domicile and triplicity (2 points). In such a case, Venus, rather than Mars would be the “predominator” (main ruler) over this position in Scorpio. Ptolemy did not use “detriment” as a concept, so there is no issue here with Venus ruling a position in Scorpio.

Predominators In the Tetrabiblos

Rectification

Ptolemy introduced this “predominator” method in Book 3, Chapter 2 of the Tetrabiblos. The passage is in a rather convoluted method of chart rectification. In that method, you first try to estimate the sign rising by ascensions. Next, you take both luminaries for a conjunctional birth (i.e. a birth after New Moon, before Full Moon) or just the one(s) above the horizon for a preventional birth (i.e. a birth before New Moon), and you find the predominator(s) of it/them by the method discussed. The degree of the predominator is the degree of the Ascendant. There can be more than one predominator. Ptolemy does not explicitly discuss “points” in the passage.

Delineating with Predominators

Ptolemy also used a predominator in a couple additional passages of the Tetrabiblos. He used one to find the “ruler” of a place that most strongly characterizes a position (Book 3, Ch. 3) and to delineate the “quality of the soul” (Book 3, Ch. 13). Only in the passage on finding the position “ruler” does he first explicitly note that a planet with more of the five claims to a place has more say over it.

In the first place, we should examine that place of the zodiac which is pertinent to the specific heading of the geniture which is subject to query; for example, the mid‑heaven, for the query about action, or the place of the sun for the question about the father; then we must observe those planets which have the election of rulership to the place in question by the five ways aforesaid; and if one planet is lord in all these ways, we must assign to him the rulership of that prediction; if two or three, we must assign it to those which have the more claims. (Ptolemy, Tetrabiblos, Book 3, Ch. 13, Robbins trans., p. 112)

The material on personality is less clear. He instructed that Mercury and the Moon are the most relevant factors for the quality of the soul (personality). Furthermore, he advised that planets “dominating” them give important indications. He allowed for more than one planet to dominate the Moon or Mercury at a time.

A Marginal Technique

Ptolemy mentions this predominator technique only a few times, and often rather informally. This suggests that he may have included it as a convenience to emphasize the point that delineation involves looking at rulers and regards. Ptolemy even allows for multiple predominators. This would be contrary to the strict “add-it-up” type of procedure. Unfortunately, an add-it-up approach figures heavily even in the astrology of those who espouse the Ptolemaic approach. For instance, Joseph Crane, in his book Astrological Roots: The Hellenistic Legacy

, used it in his discussion of special techniques for personality and other topics. A better approach would be to more carefully consider the types of aspects and rulerships involved.

A common mistake is to treat of Ptolemy’s methods as typical of Hellenistic astrology. However, Ptolemy was a highly atypical Hellenistic astrologer. In addition to Ptolemy’s odd use of the “predominator”, he also tended not to use Places or Houses for topics and discouraged the use of the lots except Fortune. Additionally, he described planetary nature and the workings of astrology in terms of physical causality through Aristotelian physics. These approaches are at a variance to those other astrologers of the day. Therefore, the predominator method is not only rare in Ptolemy’s work, but Ptolemy is also an odd breed of Hellenistic astrologer.

Why Dignity Pointing is a Problem

There are three reasons why an emphasis on dignity and its pointing leads to bad astrological chart work.

1. Dignity is Misleading

Dignity is misleading. It is easy to spot, and it carries the name “dignity”, implying goodness. However, it is not a sound indication of goodness (for instance, see the charts of Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Turner). Sign based dignity does not take into account more important factors for judging goodness like sect, place, and planetary aspects.

It is also a relatively weak and general strength consideration. Planets move through signs slowly, so sign based rejoicing conditions hold for long periods of time. In this way, sign-based conditions are more common and less individualized. Rulership of a place can make a planet more prominent and reinforced, but is less particular to the individual than factors such as place, advancement, phasis, and stations.

The one area in which sign rulership is most effective is in examining planetary testimony. However, in this Ptolemy’s approach is more capable. This is because Ptolemy’s approach takes regard and term rulership as significant, while the weighted approach tends to given no weight to regard and little to term.

2. Inaccurate Weighting

The particular weighting system used is contrived. It is inconsistent with the earlier strains of the tradition. For instance, the Hellenistic predominator at least considered the important role played by aspecting planets. It also didn’t put the important rulership by term below that by triplicity. Negative dignity is particularly suspect, as detriment is not a distinct concept of Hellenistic astrology. Furthermore, even the predominator technique was marginal in Hellenistic astrology. The more typical approach was to treat the different rulers as having different manners of connection with the position.

The weighting is also problematic for assessing planetary strength and goodness. Sign-based and place-based rejoicing conditions existed in Hellenistic astrology. However, the sign-based rejoicing conditions had nowhere near the emphasis placed on them in later traditional astrology. For instance, some early medieval astrologers considered Mercury in a mutable sign, such as Gemini or Virgo, to be a bad indication for the intellect. This is in contrast to the view that Mercury’s natural indications become super-powered when it is in domicile. In my own experience, a planet ruling itself is made more prominent and reinforced, but not better.

3. Turns One into a Numb(er) Skull

Astrologers utilizing a weighted point system for dignity tend to become attracted to overly simplistic solutions to complex delineation issues. In terms of analyzing goodness and strength, a planet’s score is often based on only one factor, its sign. However, what about conflicting considerations? Are we acknowledging that some planets have a mix of very positive and very negative associations within the same chart? Being able to differentiate these can help us predict their activation.

Going down this road of numerical cut-and-dry solutions to sticky, complex, even contradictory, life situations, can get us into trouble. Do we add up numbers to find the planet of someone’s guardian angel, based on some spuriously invented 12th century technique? How are we to contact their guardian angel to make sure it is accurate? In the next breath, we may use a different spuriously invented 16th century technique to find the name of the holy guardian angel based on more mathematical derivations. Worse still, we could value talismans more if Jupiter is +8 rather than +6. This is a sad fate to be avoided.

Astrologers going down this road are also likely to see chart work go very wrong quite often. Sadly, there are those who would chalk this up to the subversion of the fundamental archetypal planetary order of the platonic reality by the temporal evils of the age, rather than think critically about their astrology. I’ve met many such “numb skulls”. They do exist and they move astrology further and further away from sense, coherence, critical-thought, and falsifiability. They move astrology closer and closer towards the type of astrology that traditional astrologers so often criticize; an astrology based more on dogmatic assumptions about covert forces than on signs measured against observation.

References

Ptolemy, C. (1940). Ptolemy: Tetrabiblos. (F. E. Robbins, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Loeb Classical Library. Retrieved from http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Ptolemy/Tetrabiblos/home.html

Update 10/10/2018:

This article was edited and updated in 2018. Some of the improvements include a quote from Ptolemy discussing the use of the predominator and better section headings. For more information on why dignity is misleading, please see my analysis of the charts of Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Turner.

Top Seven Free Ancient Astrology Texts Online in English | Valens, Ptolemy, Maternus, and more

Posted on by
3

Online Hellenistic and Persian Texts

It is rather exciting time in the study of ancient astrology. Most of the Hellenistic and Persian source texts available in English today were first translated in the last two decades. Additionally, a lot of that material has become available online. What are the seven best free online ancient astrology texts?

Free Astrology Texts from the First Millennium

1. The Anthology by Vettius Valens, Mark Riley trans.

Last year (2010), something amazing occurred in traditional astrology. Classics scholar Mark Riley released, for free on his website, his full translation of The Anthology of Vettius Valens in searchable PDF format. While it is a translation by a non-astrologer, it is the first full English translation ever released. Books VIII and IX were previously unpublished in English. Those familiar with the Project Hindsight translations of Books I-VII should know that they were relatively expensive to purchase.

The Riley translation is a high quality English translation of what is arguably the most important text of Hellenistic astrology as far as predictive techniques are concerned. The Anthology was written in the 2nd century CE. It consists of nine books of practical ancient astrology. There is a stress on predictive techniques and Valens provides a wealth of examples.

2. The Tetrabiblos by Cladius Ptolemy, Frank Robbins trans.

The Tetrabiblos is another pivotal 2nd-century Hellenistic text. Click here to read the Tetrabiblos in English in its entirety online. The 1940 Robbins translation has its flaws but it  is a decent translation overall and great as a free reference. Bill Thayer re-typed the entire text onto his website as the text is now in the public domain.

Ptolemy is the most famous of the Hellenistic astrologers, namely due to his astronomical work (e.g. the Almagest). His intricate geocentric model of the heavens was the standard prior to the Copernican revolution. In terms of Hellenistic astrologers, his influence on European astrology of the late Middle Ages and the Renaissance is considerable. As a Hellenistic astrologer he was atypical in that he rejected some elements of the typical Hellenistic system and sought a naturalistic explanation for astrology, rather than one based on signs.

The Tetrabiblos has material on birth charts (natal astrology) and also material on interpreting charts for weather and political events (mundane astrology).

3. Mathesis by Firmicus Maternus, Jean Rhys Bram trans.

In the fourth century CE, Firmicus Maternus wrote one of the most important works of natal astrology of the Hellenistic era. The 1975 English translation by Jean Rhys Bram is not without its defects, due primarily to the fact that the translator was not an astrology. A better translation, by James Herschel Holden, was published in 2011, though it also has some idiosyncracies and comes at a high price (~$60). The Bram translation is freely available in PDF from the Astrologia Humana website of astrologer Clelia Romano.

Maternus is significant for his cookbook-style listing of example delineations for factor combinations. What might it mean to have Saturn in the 9th house during the day, as opposed to at night? Maternus will give you his opinion on some indications. This large work of 8 books is sure to give any astrologer a lot to work with in natal astrology.

4. Treatise of the Fixed Stars by Anonymous of 379, Daria Dudziak trans.

Also available for free online is an English translation of the Treatise of the Fixed Stars by Anonymous of 379 (click here). The treatise is the most notable ancient text on the effects of the fixed stars.  Those who wish to study the effects of the fixed stars from a Hellenistic standpoint will not be let down by this text.

The fixed stars were primarily used for judging eminence, character, and chronic illness. While there are many techniques for judging eminence in ancient astrology, bright fixed stars in prominent places such as conjunct the Moon or an angle, provide the strongest indications. Perso-Arabic astrologers of the early Middle Ages continued to incorporate bright fixed stars in their approaches to eminence.

The link provided above provides access to the treatise as well as a table of the constellations and maps of the constellations which show the star positions.

5. Definitions by Serapio of Alexandria, Eduardo Gramaglia trans.

Serapio is a Hellenistic astrologer from about the 1st century CE whose works are mostly lost. A nearly complete set of definitions survives from him. The last page of his manuscript is lost to history. However, note that the definitions are from a late Byzantine compilation and are known to contain additions and alterations from the Middle Ages. An English translation of the text by Eduardo Gramaglia was made available as a PDF in late 2013.  Click here to access the translation.

The text is notable because it is an early text in the Hellenistic tradition and explicitly defines key parts of the system. For instance, Serapio marks out which houses are malefic and which are benefic. He also discusses how planets earlier in the zodiac have “superiority” over planets later in the zodiac when in aspect, and even when in the same sign.

An even more influential early set of definitions is attributable to Antiochus of Athens. That set of definitions forms a large part of Porphyry’s Introduction to the Tetrabiblos. It is also included in Rhetorius of Egypt’s Compendium. Serapio’s Definitions were translated together with the Porphyry text in one volume by James Herschel Holden, published in 2009. Holden also published a translation of Rhetorius the same year.

6. Carmen Astrologicum by Dorotheus of Sidon, David Pingree trans.

While an excellent translation of Dorotheus emerged in 2017 by Ben Dykes (image below), the older Pingree translation is partially available for free. Deborah Houlding has made the first three of the five books available free as PDFs on her website, Skyscript: Book I, Book II, Book III (her notes on Book III). She has stated her intention to make all five books available so stay tuned to the page for updates. This is a pivotal text but I position it near the bottom of this list as only 3 of the 5 books are freely available at this time.

Dorotheus wrote the large and influential Carmen Astrologicum (Song of Astrology) in verse in the 1st century CE. It has 4 books on interpreting charts of birth time (natal astrology). It also has 1 book on choosing lucky times to start activities and judging matters from the time of an event (electional/inceptional astrology). Dorotheus is perhaps the astrologer with the greatest influence on Perso-Arabic astrology. In addition to containing important natal astrology, he is the source for original Hellenistic electional astrology. His rules for electional astrology also form the foundation for the later practice of horary astrology.

7. Centiloquium by Pseudo-Ptolemy, Henry Coley trans.

The Centilogquium is a set of astrological aphorisms by an unknown author, which was ascribed to Ptolemy. The aphorisms likely come from the Perso-Arabic period (~9th century CE). The aphorisms are available for study on Deborah Houlding’s website, Skyscript. While it is a lesser work, and somewhat disorganized, the aphorisms deal with all areas of astrology. They were also historically influential, as discussed on the site.

Hellenistic Critical Editions Online

I’ve focused on free English texts online. However, you may also be interested in critical editions of Hellenistic texts in their original languages. There are many available online. Chris Brennan has organized a valuable list of free critical editions on his Hellenistic Astrology website.

Note on 2018 Update

This article was updated on 10/01/2018 to drop a dead link, add more online texts, and restructure the article as a Top 7. Some of the texts – the partial translation of Dorotheus and Serapio’s Definitions – became available after the publication of the original article. 

Featured image of third-century Heracles papyrus is in the public domain.